This paper reviews existing measures of user information satisfaction (UIS) and selects one for replication and extension. A survey of production managers is used to provide additional support for the instrument, eliminate scales that are psychometrically unsound, and develop a standard short form for use when only an overall assessment of information satisfaction is required and survey time is limited. The authors examine various UIS measures, including those developed by Gallagher, Jenkins and Ricketts, Larcker and Lessig, and Pearson. They find that Pearson's measure, which includes 39 scales, has the most empirical support and covers both the information system product and general system services. However, the measure is lengthy and may be difficult to use in research and practice. The authors then conduct a study to assess the validity and reliability of Pearson's measure and to refine it for use in research and practice. They find that Pearson's measure has good reliability and content validity, but the reliability scores may be inflated due to the way items are scored. The authors also find that Pearson's measure has good predictive validity. They then develop a short form of the instrument by eliminating scales that showed undesirable psychometric qualities and reducing the number of items per scale. The short form is validated and found to have good reliability and validity. The authors conclude that Pearson's measure, with the extensions and improvements presented, represents substantial progress toward establishing a standard measurement technique for UIS. They encourage further research and the dissemination of the instrument to the practicing information systems community.This paper reviews existing measures of user information satisfaction (UIS) and selects one for replication and extension. A survey of production managers is used to provide additional support for the instrument, eliminate scales that are psychometrically unsound, and develop a standard short form for use when only an overall assessment of information satisfaction is required and survey time is limited. The authors examine various UIS measures, including those developed by Gallagher, Jenkins and Ricketts, Larcker and Lessig, and Pearson. They find that Pearson's measure, which includes 39 scales, has the most empirical support and covers both the information system product and general system services. However, the measure is lengthy and may be difficult to use in research and practice. The authors then conduct a study to assess the validity and reliability of Pearson's measure and to refine it for use in research and practice. They find that Pearson's measure has good reliability and content validity, but the reliability scores may be inflated due to the way items are scored. The authors also find that Pearson's measure has good predictive validity. They then develop a short form of the instrument by eliminating scales that showed undesirable psychometric qualities and reducing the number of items per scale. The short form is validated and found to have good reliability and validity. The authors conclude that Pearson's measure, with the extensions and improvements presented, represents substantial progress toward establishing a standard measurement technique for UIS. They encourage further research and the dissemination of the instrument to the practicing information systems community.